The Rockefellers learned nearly a century ago that there are two standard ways for one of their companies to absorb another corporation. If the firm to be acquired is much smaller, a "take over" is the simplest procedure: buy em out.
But if the competitor is more your equal, a merger- "must be arranged".
The same principles hold tru...e among nations. No matter how much this country sends abroad as foreign aid, technical assistance, loans that are never repai4. or other largesse, there is simply no way another country -or even a bloc of countries- can be made powerful enough to take us over.
Recognizing this political fact of life, the master planners devised the strategy of a merger - a Great Merger - among nations.
But before such a merger can be consummated, and the United States becomes just another province in a New World Order, there must at least be the semblance of parity among the senior partners in the deal
How does one make the nations of the world more nearly equal?
The Insiders determined that a twoprong approach was needed, use American money and know-how to build up your competitors, while at the same time use every devious strategy you can devise to weaken and impoverish this country. The goal is not to bankrupt the United States, we must emphasize. Rather, it is to reduce our productive might, and therefore our standard of living, to the meager subsistence level of the socialized nations of the world.
Only a fascist-socialist dictatorship would have the power to accomplish such a " redistribution." Notice that the plan is not to bring the standard of living in less developed countries up to our level, but to bring ours down to meet theirs coming up.
You may be assured, however, that the Rockefellers and their allies are not talking about reducing their own quality of life. It is your standard of living which must be sacrificed on the altar of the New World Order.
The Rockefeller game plan is to use population, energy, food, and financial controls as a method of people control which will lead, steadily and deliberately, into the Great Merger. Much of the spade work for setting up this ploy is being done by Henry Kissinger, who was a personal employee of Nelson Rockefeller for a decade before Rocky placed him in the Nixon Administration. On numerous occasions Herr Kissinger has declared that his goal is to create a "New World Order." Syndicated Washington columnist Paul Scott reveals:
"It is Kissinger's belief, according to his aides, that by controlling food, one can control people, and by controlling energy, especially oil, one can control nations and their -financial systems. By placing food and oil under international control along with the world's monetary system, Kissinger is convinced a loosely knit world government operating, under the frame-work of the United Nations can become a reality before 1980."
Common sense tells us that a Rockefeller hireling such as Kissinger would not be setting up an "international control" system which takes assets from the Rockefellers and gives them to someone else. Obviously, the game plan is to take other people's assets and put them under the umbrella of a Rockefeller-controlled World Government.
This new strategy may be termed the " crisis route" to World Order. It runs parallel to and eventually will converge with the Atlantic Union treaty and regional government approach to the Universal State. Washington columnist Paul Scott calls this "the new strategy change from the direct to the indirect approach to bring about world government."
The plan, as publicly stated by the CFR's [Council on Foreign Relations-founded by the Rockefellers] Richard Gardner, part-time State Department functionary and Columbia University Professor of Law and International Organization, amounts to this:
Instead of trying to make the UN a complete world dictatorship immediately, the Establishment will identify different problems in different countries. Then they will propose a "solution," which can only be achieved by some kind of international agency, so that each country concerned will be forced to surrender another segment of its national independence. Gardner considers this piecemeal approach the practical road to the end of nationhood.
We are likely to do better by building our "house of world order - from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great - booming, buzzing confusion" to use William James' facetious description of reality; but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, is likely to get us to world order faster than the old-fashioned frontal assault.
So this is what the Rockefeller gang, working through agents like Kissinger and Gardner, have in mindan "end run around national sovereignty." Gardner continues, with obvious glee:
"The hopeful aspect of the present situation is that even as nations resist appeals for' world government'and 'the surrender of sovereignty,' technological, economic and political interests are forcing them to establish more and more far-ranging institutions to manage their mutual interdependence."
One of the most obvious back-door approaches to World Order is through the control of food [and water..Ken] . The ploy is to establish a World Food Bank, with the necessary goodies supplied (naturally) by the United States. The concept was proposed at the International Monetary Fund Conference in Nairobi by long-time Rockefeller front man Robert S McNamara (CFR). R. StrangeMcNamara (yes, that really is his middle name) was made president of the World Bank after he had successfully completed his earlier assignment of crippling this country's military might [Johnson Administration during Vietnam War]. McNamara advocated the food-producing nations of the world surrender their surpluses to a " world authority," which would then take charge of redistributing the bounty to the 'have-not" nations. The topic was to be discussed at the UN's World Food Conference in Rome in November 1974. Between the time of the original proposal and the Rome conference, Richard Nixon was shuftIed into an early retirement and was replaced by a compliant Gerald Ford:
One of Ford's first official acts was to go before the UN General Assembly and assure the international flotsam gathered there that the voice of the Rockefeller's Charlie McCarthy, Henry Kissinger, was the very voice of America in all matters pertaining to international relations. Later, Ford announced that the Secretary of State would appear as keynote speaker on behalf of the United States at the upcoming World Food Conference, superseding the more logical choice, Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz, who was the official head of the US delegation. Of the hundreds of political commentators around the country, only Paul Scott had the courage to assess the implications ofFord's actions:
"Whether he fully realizes it or not, President Ford has put his stamp of approval on Secretary of State Henry Kissinger's grand design foreign policy for the establishment of a loosely knit world government before the end of the 1970s.
By calling for the development of a global strategy and policy for food and oil within the structure of the United Nations, the President clearly signaled his acceptance of the 'new international order' being sought by Kissinger."
Scott went on to point out that instead of using this nation's enormous food production as a weapon of US foreign policy, to promote the expansion of freedom throughout the world, Ford accepted Kissinger's plan of passing policy control over US food surpluses, "and eventually all US food " to a national food bank.
Herr Henry made no bones about the fact that all of this is designed to further the New World Order. He told the delegates at Rome: "We are faced not just with the problem of food but with the accelerating momentum of our interdependence." And our-man in Rome went even further; he declared we should "make global cooperation in food a model, for our response to other challenges of an interdependent world - energy, inflation, population, protection of the environment."
Agriculture Secretary Earl Butz admitted of the proposed food bank that "in the end it will be the American taxpayer who pays for it." Who else? And the fact that worldwide distribution of our food will inevitably create food shortages and skyrocketing prices in America has not been overlooked by the Rockefeller conspirators. That is part of the plan.
And before you conclude that any such program would be emphatically rejected by an angry American electorate, remember this: by the time the plan is implemented, the UN will have an army to back up its looting of America! [called the "MJTF", Multi-Joint Task Force, and "PFP", Partnership for Peace. that is insinuated with the American military and Police Departemnts throughout America..Ken]. Doubtless the clan's minions in the bureaucracy and the media will refer to the planned food shortage as a mandatory national diet program.
The whole thrust of the Rome gathering was that it is the obligation of the United States-which means you, the worker and taxpayer -to feed the world. This, despite the fact that for years America has supplied more than 80 % of the food given to foreign countries. It is such American giveaways that in recent years have provided over $25 billion in foodstuffs to such ingrates as Marxist India, now a dictatorship openly allied with the Soviet Union, where the bulk of our grains winds up feeding rats, not hungry people.
* While US reserves of food and feed grains are already being depleted, Russia and Communist China have quietly been using part of their massive purchases of bargain-priced American grain to build up their stockpiles. Crews of US and foreign ships carrying US grain to Russian and Chinese ports have been told by Communist dock workers that every third or fourth shipment of US grain is being placed in permanent storage facilities as part of those countries 'national reserves'.
At least $200 billion in such aid has been similarly squandered to more than 125 nations-including more millions now going to members of the OPEC cartel, which has quadrupled oil prices. To pay for all of these giveaways, the Insiders who run the show have used printing press inflation money to add hundreds of billions of dollars to our National Debt. This, coupled with the consequent reduction of domestic supplies, has sent our own food prices out of sight.
But, at least in the past, our stupidity was of our own doing and under our own control. Informed Americans could have stopped it-and could still stop it today-by throwing the Congressmen who voted for the giveaways out of office. In the future, when the Rockefeller Kissinger plan for the international authority over food is implemented, our food supply will no longer be under our control. What then?
Increasingly we hear plaintive bleats from the Rockefellers' sheep in the media, calling for Americans to make increased sacrifices to feed the rest of the world. Incredible as it may seem, the truth-twisters of the airwaves and press are attempting to make us feel guilty that we are not starving.
None of these Rockefeller lackeys dares suggest, of course, that the difference between American agricultural production and the poverty levels of the so-called -have not- nations is the difference between individualism [true free enterprise-with competition-and private entrepreneurship], with its reliance on private property and free enterprise, and feudalism-fascismsocialism-col
This is not to say America's agricultural system is perfect. To the extent that we have instituted price supports and subsidies, paying men not to grow food, we have suffered. Nevertheless, the success of American agriculture under freedom is a model the rest of the world should be encouraged to copy.
But if more nations achieved independence in food production, much of the impetus for world government would disappear faster than a freeloader when the check arrives. In order for the Rockefellers to achieve their New World Order, first they must create famines and the fear of further suffering [this is where the Doom & Gloomers like <http://educate-yourself.org/
All that is required to create a famine is to put all agriculture under control of government bureaucracy, then wait awhile. The bigger the bureaucracy, the shorter the wait, and international bureaucracy is the best at producing red tape, instead of wheat.
Intertwined with the food production grab is the push for <http://educate-yourself.org/
Coinciding with the UN-sponsored conferences in Nairobi and Rome, the United Nations sponsored the World Population Conference at Bucharest, Romania in August 1974. Headlining the program was none other than John D. Rockefeller III, who proclaimed: "I come to Bucharest with an urgent call for a deep and probing reappraisal of all that has been done in the population field. I have changed my mind and now believe family planning alone is not adequate. "
An Associated Press report explained:
"- Rockefeller ... has for years been one of the world's leading advocates of family planning. He donated millions of dollars toward population research and is founder and chairman of the Population Council, a private US organization funded [millions of dollars] largely by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations."
The wire service continued:
"His speech reflected the viewpoint voiced at this conference by many members of the Third World and Socialist [that is, Communist] countries."
John D. III obviously felt right at home behind the Iron Curtain, as he called for a redistribution of wealth and piously proclaimed that modem development should emphasize "inequitable distribution of the fruits of progress."
In his remarks to the gathering of people planners, the eldest of the Royal Rockefellers made three main points:
First, he echoed the Communist line that the rich must give their wealth to the 'poor'.
Second, he asserted that voluntary family planning is inadequate and called for Big Brother to start dictating whether or not a couple is permitted to have a baby.
Third, in calling for -moderate levels of consumption- in advanced nations, Rockefeller advocated that Americans voluntarily reduce their standard of living.
The fact that it is a little incongruous-not to say hypocritical-for a man whose family is worth uncounted millions, who has thousands of servants, hundreds of luxurious homes and lives in an opulence unknown by the oriental potentates of yore, to ask the rest of his fellow citizens to scale down their living standards, went unnoticed in the New York Times. But to belabor the obvious, whose wealth do you think Rockefeller wants 'to share', yours or his?
Going along with the call by Rockefeller (who claimed the 'United Nations is the world's highest authority' for governmental control over people), the conference set in motion the machinery to institutionalize the totalitarian demands of the Stop the Storkers.
The Washington Post ,a chief Establishment mouthpiece, has discussed the Nazi like policies being advocated by the people planners:
"The day may be approaching when couples will have to prove eligibility and demonstrate qualifications before they are permitted to become parents."
Or there may be baby ration cards for couples, group marriages, mass distribution of anti-fertility drugs, parent licensing, legal Polygamy, abortions on demand, more varied life options for women and more restricted ones for men-such as forced paternity leave for new fathers.
Understand that such enforced infertility is not planned for India or Senegal, but for the United States, where zero population growth is already a fact.
All this, despite the provable fact that there is ample room on earth for all of us-in fact if every man woman and child in the entire world moved to the State of Washington, (twentieth in size of all the states), each would have 490 square feet of space.
But we are being led to believe that unless we give Big Brother total power over people's rights to have children, we will all be ankle deep in human beings within a decade. Such august organizations as the National Academy of Sciences are helping to hawk this Rockefeller line, with doomsday messages such as:
"There can be no doubt concerning the long-term prognosis. Either the birth rate of the world must come down or the death rate must go up."
This is not to discount the possibility that overpopulation, particularly in backward nations, cannot be a genuine problem. But, if the Rockefellers were truly interested in curbing population growth without enslaving everybody, there is a much better solution. When a country's standard of living goes up, the birth rate goes down-voluntarily. Assist nations such as India and Red China to benefit by the adoption of free market, private property principles, and the abundance produced by such newly free peoples would astound the world. The Rockefellers, however, are interested in more controls, not fewer problems.
The specious Rockefeller argument that the world must accept Mao-style people control or perish is so phony that it is amazing the conspirators have gotten anyone to buy it. As Reverend R. J. Rushdoony points out in his excellent book, The Myth of Overpopulation:
"Socialism always creates ultimately an imbalance between the number of people living and their food supply, which results in hunger or famine. There is in this sense therefore always a problem of overpopulation under socialism. Socialism, moreover, affects both the food supplies, by limiting it, and also the population, by both expanding it at one stage and limiting it at another."
To the Rockefellers, socialism is not a system for redistributing wealth - especially not for redistributing their wealth -but a system to control people and competitors. Socialism puts power in the hands of the government. And since the Rockefellers control the government, government control means Rockefeller control. You may not have known this, but you can be sure they do!
When the Rockefellers join the UN's WorId Population Conference in calling for the promotion
"of a new economic order by eradicating the cause of worId poverty, by ensuring the equitable distribution of the world resources, by eliminating the injustices of existing world trade systems and exploitation perpetrated by capitalistic ... corporations, "
something smells as fishy as an unwashed tuna boat.
Curbing population growth is just part of the Rockefeller war on the American family. Abortion is another. According to John H. Knowles, president of the Rockefeller Foundation and one of America's foremost promoters of the slaughter of the unborn, the goal of the FoundatIon is to achieve the capacity in America for 1.8 million abortions every year.
Not coincidentally, it was John D. Rockefeller III who was appointed by Richard Nixon as chairman of the newly created Commission on Population Growth and the American Future. In accepting the appointment, John D III pontificated:
" The average citizen doesn't appreciate the social and economic implications of population growth and what it does to the quality of all our lives. Rather than think of popuhition control as a negative thing, we should see that it can be enriching. "
One of the early reports of the Rockefeller Commission recommended:
"... that present state laws restricting abortion be liberalized along the lines of the New York State Statute, such abortions to be performed on request by duly licensed physicians under conditions of medical safety."
And the Commisssion further suggested that federal, state, and local governments make funds available to support abortion services in states with liberalized statutes. 'Rockefeller is so callous about individual beliefs that he would forcibly extract money from Catholic taxpayers, among others, to fmance what their religion teaches is the murder of the unborn. Tough rocks, says the Rock:"Religious preconceptions must be overcome. "
The New York model abortion law which chairman John enthusiastically applauded was passed, of course, under the leadership of brother Nelson Rockefeller. During the Vice Presidential confirmation hearings, Dr. Charles Rice, Professor of Law at the Notre Dame Law School, characterized Nelson as "the incarnate symbol of the anti-life movement" and said that Mr. Rockefeller "is perhaps the leading proponent of permissive abortion in the United States."
The Rockefellers have even financed the establishment of an abortion mill. In the summer of 1971, Planned Parenthood in New York City opened its first large scale abortion center, a prototype for the development of additional centers throughout the city, state, and nation. The center was originally designed to perform more than 10 000 abortions a year for an average fee of $80, with funds provided in many cases by Medicaid. The initial funds to establish the abortion mill came from a $200,000 pledge from The Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
The past three generations of Rockefellers have not been notoriously considerate of other people's feelings and beliefs. When a group of pro-life activists picketed a speech by Nelson Rockefellerin Nebraska, the loveable old politician told a 15 year old girl: "Don't knock it [abortion], girl, you might need one someday."
In all wars this nation has fought, from the battle of Lexington in 1776 through the last fatality in Vietnam, American combat deaths totaled 668, 226 men. Yet, in just the single year of 1972, 700,000 innocent babies were killed in this country, legally, befure they could draw their first breath. (Current estimates are that this figure could increase to 1.6 million abortions a year.)
That is the price of the Rockefellers' promotion of easy abortion in the United States. But it is just part of the price all of us will pay (and pay, and pay), if the people planners succeed in herding all of us into their New World Order.
Yes, the Rockefellers are planners. As John D.'s aide, Fred Gates, once confessed: "In our dreams we have limitless resources and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands."
Now, thanks to the taxpayers, the Rockefellers have almost limitless funds. As a result, faceless bureaucrats in Washington whom you did not hire and whom you cannot fire -now tell you how to run your business, whom you may hire, where your children will be bussed to school, what products you can purchase, and even what foods you can (and cannot) eat. It is only a matter of time until the dictocrats tell you how many children you are permitted to have.
There is nothing wrong with planning. The question is who is doing it. Our Founding Fathers believed people should be free to plan their own lives. The Rockefellers believe their agents in the federal government must plan your life for you. It is a simple choice: Will you run your own life, or will you be forced to obey the dictates ofbureaucrats, social workers, college professors, sociologists, psychologists, and others who are fronting for the House of Rockefeller?
Nelson is very candid about it. In an October 1975 interview in Playboy magazine, Rocky admitted:
"I'm a great believer in planning. Economic, social, political, military, total world planning." (Emphasis added. )
When Big Brother arrives, he may well be wearing horn-rimmed glasses.
Gary Allen
No comments:
Post a Comment